5. MATERIALES Y METODOS
5.2. Metodología
5.2.3. Tratamientos pre germinativos
Foundation. 61. Source: http://www. candafoundation.org/ 62. Source: http://candafoundation. org/results-learning/ beneficiary-stories/bangladesh Figure 4:
C&A Foundation Strategy61
Sustainable Product Sustainable Supply Sustainable Lives
• Improving organic cotton farmer livelihoods • Exploring alternative fibres • Enabling fibre reuse and
recycling
• Increasing supply chain trans- parency
• Improving the environmental impact of the apparel industry • Securing safe water supplies for
communities
• Improving the working conditions for apparel workers • Inspiring C&A employees to
help their communities • Assisting communities to
recover from disaster • Supporting early-childhood
CORPORATE CASE STUDIES
TO ILLUSTRATE CORPORATE SOCIAL IMPACT STRATEGIES
63. Source: http://www.ssireview. org/blog/entry/only_the_ humble_improve
by Germany’s Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and TBM Consulting. They helped participating factories implement the most efficient lean manufacturing techniques and introduced managers to motivational skills and tools that also benefit workers, such as change management committees (bringing managers and employees together), team-based produc- tivity bonus schemes, skills matrix payment systems, and absenteeism bonuses.
The SSP programme brought important benefits to factory owners and employees, as well as to C&A. For example, a factory belonging to the Sumber Bintang Rejeki Company in Indonesia saw efficiency rise from 58% of full capacity to almost 80% and the percentage of defects fall from 4 % to 2%. Absenteeism also dropped, from about 5% to less than 2%. In the wake of such improve- ments, the owners chose to pay full price to implement similar changes in their other facilities. One of the many workers who benefited was Taslima Akther Shumi, a sewing machine operator at Vintage Denim Limited in Dhaka. After joining the newly established employees’ committee and getting additional training, her motivation increased and her performance improvements merited an 11% pay-rise to well above the minimum wage.
While C&A Foundation funded the initial programme, they found the expense and duration of the programme a challenge to scale. These and other insights drawn from the first SSP are informing a shorter, accelerated version to be tested next, with the aim to see if it could still achieve at least 80% of the gains. If the next version is successful, it could be scaled up to improve the productivity of hundreds of suppliers globally.63
The sustainable product pillar includes a significant programme launched in 2013 to boost organic cotton production in supplier countries by working with small farmers, providing appropriate seed varieties, conducting research into the potential of organic cotton worldwide and the environmental (water usage and pollution) implications of growing cotton.
By working in partnership with this global business, C&A Foundation is able to leverage resources, networks and partnerships to address opportunities in the apparel sector. The Foundation Board includes senior C&A leaders who provide thought leadership and guidance to ensure that the Foundation’s approach is aligned with C&A’s corporate sustainability objectives. In addition to the two initiatives above, the Foundation also partners with the business in the Partnership for Cleaner Textile in Bangladesh and the Better Mill Initiative in China.
C&A Foundation is an ideal vehicle for C&A to test ideas and implement measures and models. The Foundation can work with local partners, such as non-profit organisations or individuals, it can provide different forms of financing to its small-scale partners, it can have a long-term time horizon and be a patient investor, and it can have a broad vision and eco-system approach. C&A’s toolkit also reflects an evolution of corporate foundations to increasingly incorporate an engaged venture philanthropy approach, and to consider other actors in the eco-system as partners. This approach presents great opportunities for collaboration with the VP/SI sector, which the C&A Foundation is also a member of.
51
CORPORATE CASE STUDIES
TO ILLUSTRATE CORPORATE SOCIAL IMPACT STRATEGIES
MAY 2015
3.4. Governance structures of Corporate Social Impact
Initiatives
During the interviews it also became clear that even though governance structures are important for success – or reversely poor governance structures can complicate and slow down and deteriorate the quality of decision processes – the governance structures of the different corporate social impact initiatives are hardly a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution. Companies are still exploring different ways of organising this area and/or are still left with legacy structures based on how things have historically grown in their respective organisations.
It would seem logical that the level of integration of the Corporate Social Impact Strategy would be reflected in the governance structure of that strategy and its relation to the mother company. Governance could be considered as a tool, which if in sync with the investment philosophy, could facilitate the success of the investment.
Starting from the lower right hand box of our framework, we can say that inclusive business strategies all follow more or less the same model: high level of integration into the business and therefore part of the governance structure of the company. As mentioned in the cases earlier, inclusive business models are often managed and led by the core business entity; therefore we can say that the corporate social impact strategy is housed in whatever structure the corporation has. A good case in point is Lafarge, where the Affordable Housing Programme is integrated in the marketing & sales department of the local subsidiaries, being responsible for the last mile distribution of Lafarge’s products and services as well as the performance of the programme. The search for and production of their innovative soil bricks is also fully integrated in the respective functional departments of the company, R&D and Operations.
The middle box of our framework, where we placed Corporate Impact Venturing, contains examples with varying governance models, all of which, however, show a bit more distance from the mother company than in the case of inclusive businesses. Corporate Impact Funds are often set up as separate entities, sometimes jointly with co-investors, which would require an independent organisation. Renault’s Mobiliz Invest or the Livelihood Fund are separate legal entities with their own management teams and reduced influence of their mother companies.
Although it is a separate legal entity, the Danone Ecosystem Fund has strong links to Danone through its governance and decision making process (see Figure 5). The Fund currently reports to the General Manager of Procurement (‘Danone Trade’). The president of the Fund is the Head of the Water Business Division to make sure that there is a sponsor at the Executive Committee level. The Social Innovation Committee examines proposals from local subsidiaries and makes recommendations on investment approval, investment size, and milestones/conditions for investment. It is comprised 50% from the General Managers
CORPORATE CASE STUDIES
TO ILLUSTRATE CORPORATE SOCIAL IMPACT STRATEGIES
Figure 5:
Governance structure of the Danone Ecosystem Fund64
64. Source: http://ecosysteme. danone.com/danone-ecosystem- fund/decision-making-process/ Guidance
Committee
Subsidiaries Fund Team Social Innovation
Committee Board of Directors The Guidance Committee determines the Fund’s overall strategy and investment principles. The subsidiaries identify projects for the Fund team.
The Fund Team assesses projects & puts together proposals to be presented to the SIC by the GM.
The SIC examines the proposals and ensures that projects are consistent with Danone policy and the purpose of the Fund. The Board determines the amounts and nature of investments and identifies priorities.
of Danone’s worldwide business units and 50% from relevant corporate functions such as Communications and Procurement. The committee meets four times a year. Such high involvement from the business units ensures continued buy-in and support from Danone and appropriate level of resources, when necessary.
These independent entities, however, all try to leverage the experience of their mother companies by integrating top managers into their boards or governing bodies to help identify potential synergies and ensure the right people are talking to each other.
And finally, less integrated structures like corporate foundations, e.g. the C&A Foundation or the Shell Foundation are very much separate from the mother company, often not having links other than reporting to the CEO or the Executive Committee and company represent- atives sitting on the foundation’s board. This distance gives them significant flexibility and freedom, however, it may make it difficult for them to raise awareness about their work and recruit people from within the company, unless they have maximum support of the top management.
C&A Foundation is a separate legal entity from the C&A retail business, yet senior business leaders participate in its governance to ensure complementarity with C&A’s corporate sustainability objectives. At the same time, the C&A Foundation leadership sits on the global sustainability board of C&A. C&A Foundation staff closely align their work with the C&A corporate communications team, the sustainable business development team, as well as the sustainable supply chain team, and external stakeholder relations.
C&A Europe’s Sustainability Committee is chaired by selected members of the European Executive Board (EEB) and comprises representatives from key functions across the company. The Sustainability Committee is scheduled to meet quarterly to review performance of the sustainability programme and prepare relevant recommendations to the EEB.
53